From: Dominick Grift <dominick.grift@defensec.nl>
To: Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com>
Cc: Paul Moore <paul@paul-moore.com>,
Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com>,
SElinux list <selinux@vger.kernel.org>,
Stephen Smalley <stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com>,
Daniel Walsh <dwalsh@redhat.com>,
Zdenek Pytela <zpytela@redhat.com>,
virtio-fs-list <virtio-fs@redhat.com>,
Miklos Szeredi <mszeredi@redhat.com>
Subject: Re: virtiofs and its optional xattr support vs. fs_use_xattr
Date: Tue, 08 Dec 2020 16:13:42 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <ypjl8sa8miu1.fsf@defensec.nl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20201208143336.GB3212@redhat.com> (Vivek Goyal's message of "Tue, 8 Dec 2020 09:33:36 -0500")
Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> writes:
> On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 10:22:35PM +0100, Dominick Grift wrote:
>> Vivek Goyal <vgoyal@redhat.com> writes:
>>
>> > On Mon, Dec 07, 2020 at 10:03:24AM -0500, Paul Moore wrote:
>> >> On Mon, Dec 7, 2020 at 9:43 AM Ondrej Mosnacek <omosnace@redhat.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> > Hi everyone,
>> >> >
>> >> > In [1] we ran into a problem with the current handling of filesystem
>> >> > labeling rules. Basically, it is only possible to specify either
>> >> > genfscon or fs_use_xattr for a given filesystem, but in the case of
>> >> > virtiofs, certain mounts may support security xattrs, while other ones
>> >> > may not.
>> >>
>> >
>> > [ cc virtio-fs list and miklos ]
>> >> Quickly skimming the linked GH issue, it appears that the problem
>> >> really lies in the fact that virtiofs allows one to enable/disable
>> >> xattrs at mount time. What isn't clear to me is why one would need to
>> >> disable xattrs, can you explain that use case? Why does enabling
>> >> xattrs in virtiofs cause problems?
>> >
>> > Its not exactly a mount time option. Its a virtiofs file server option.
>> >
>> > xattr support by default is disabled because it has performance
>> > penalty. Users can enable it if they want to.
>>
>> if SELinux is enabled then you should preferably just use fs_use xattr unconditionally
>>
>> >
>> > So if virtiofsd starts without xattr support and somebody runs a
>> > VM with SELinux enabled, they should still be able to mount virtiofs,
>> > I guess (instead of failing it).
>>
>> SELinux requires that everything is always labeled one way or another
>> and so if SELinux is enabled one should either use genfscon or fs_use xattr
>>
>> Since is support fs_use xattr that should be the default and if any
>> would for any reason want to replace that with genfscon then that is
>> something they have to address (by excluding the fs_use xattr rule and
>> replacing it with a genfscon rule (not sure why anyone would ever want
>> that)
>>
>> Gist is that if SELinux is enabled then one of the two should be
>> present, preferably fs_use xattr (so thats the default).
>
> I understand that current state is that one needs to choose either
> genfscon or fs_use_xattr depending on filesystem type. Will be nice
> if this was more flexibile.
>
> If virtiofsd is running on top of a filesystem which does not support
> xattr, then also virtiofs mount will fail.
>
> IOW, with virtiofs both kind of configurations can be easily produed
> (xattr enabled or disabled). So none of the defaults (genfscon or
> fs_use_xattr) seems to be ideal.
>
> IIUC, policy is assuming that virtiofs will either always support xattr
> or will not always support xattrs. Which probably is true for many
> filesystems. But not necessarily in this case. So hard coding one
> assumption will break other configurations. It will be nice if we there
> is a way to fix this in policy.
Sorry I think I misunderstood the issue. James Carter's solution sounds
like the way to go.
Either that or just dont support fs_use xattr and always mount the whole
location with a context specified from configuration (mount -t virtiofs -o context=).
>
> Thanks
> Vivek
>
--
gpg --locate-keys dominick.grift@defensec.nl
Key fingerprint = FCD2 3660 5D6B 9D27 7FC6 E0FF DA7E 521F 10F6 4098
https://sks-keyservers.net/pks/lookup?op=get&search=0xDA7E521F10F64098
Dominick Grift
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2020-12-08 15:14 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2020-12-07 14:42 virtiofs and its optional xattr support vs. fs_use_xattr Ondrej Mosnacek
2020-12-07 15:03 ` Paul Moore
2020-12-07 20:52 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-07 21:22 ` Dominick Grift
2020-12-08 14:33 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-08 15:13 ` Dominick Grift [this message]
2020-12-08 23:41 ` Paul Moore
2020-12-07 17:17 ` James Carter
2020-12-08 23:45 ` Paul Moore
2020-12-09 15:37 ` James Carter
2020-12-10 2:39 ` Paul Moore
2020-12-10 9:29 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2020-12-10 22:17 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-10 22:24 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2020-12-10 22:30 ` Vivek Goyal
2020-12-11 9:15 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2020-12-11 13:29 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-01-04 20:14 ` Vivek Goyal
2021-01-05 14:00 ` Ondrej Mosnacek
2021-01-05 14:21 ` Vivek Goyal
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=ypjl8sa8miu1.fsf@defensec.nl \
--to=dominick.grift@defensec.nl \
--cc=dwalsh@redhat.com \
--cc=mszeredi@redhat.com \
--cc=omosnace@redhat.com \
--cc=paul@paul-moore.com \
--cc=selinux@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=stephen.smalley.work@gmail.com \
--cc=vgoyal@redhat.com \
--cc=virtio-fs@redhat.com \
--cc=zpytela@redhat.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).